General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhich personal, sincere beliefs do you think disqualify a person from prominent jobs.
Like public office or CEO of a large company.
For example, if a person sincerely believes black people are inferior to white people I think most of us think that would disqualify them from public office.
What else?
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Society does keep evolving, which means what is acceptable today, might not be ten years from now - and sometimes things move in both positive and negative directions. I guess the other question is how those beliefs might actually interact with their actual job.
Bryant
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)But he became president anyway. It's inconceivable that any Democrat could ever again become president if he or she held that view.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)If the Republican Party implodes for example - which is possible - than the Democratic party might move further and further right, while a new party picks up the slack on the left.
You do occasionally see things take steps backwards as well - consider how leftists movements were looked at in the 30s vs the 50s. They went from being more or less respectable to being hated enemies in some 15 years.
Bryant
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)traits are not always indicative of a healthy individual.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)and someone who's beliefs put a company at risk of violating those laws is unlikely to be hired for a prominent position.
Or, if hired, they probably aren't going to last long.
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)Anything that makes you think the future is not worth worrying about because Gawd will take care of it a la Watt.
hatrack
(59,599 posts)Racism
Sexism (including gender identity and sexual preference);
Dominionist or other "End Times" beliefs
Scientology, Solar Temple or other cult membership;
"States' Rights" or other coded Neo-Confederate ideologies;
Avowed denial of evolution, climate science; support of "Creation Science" education or anti-vaccination campaigns.
As you an see, I'm kind of idealist . . . and a bit behind the reality curve here . .
PADemD
(4,482 posts)"Enhanced interrogation" is not torture.
Corporations are people.
Money is free speech.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,226 posts)Basically, if he or she can't see someone else as an equal based on some inherent characteristic, he or she shouldn't be charged to oversee others.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)We live in a democracy, in which people get to elect their governmental representatives. We hope they won't elect people with bigoted beliefs, for example. But we don't "disqualify" people from office based on what they believe. If they do something criminal while in office, then we recall or impeach them.
As for private companies, what standard do we have that tells them what their CEOs have to believe?
Jeezus, people. We're for free speech but not free "beliefs"? People who hold heinous beliefs have the right to their beliefs in this country. If they act on those beliefs, then society has means of delivering consequences. But we don't prescreen people for their beliefs.
JaydenD
(294 posts)Would I trust that person to be my dentist, or my kids teacher?
No way. Then how can I trust that kind of person to be leader of the free world.